|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 9:36 am
opaj Owle, all I've been doing is cobbling together what everyone else has been suggesting piece-by-piece. domokun And doing a very good job of it. 3nodding Okay...Um, maybe this is just because I'm tired, but Elevar, didn't you say everything you just said in your last post before? sweatdrop
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 10:49 am
Owle Isohos Okay...Um, maybe this is just because I'm tired, but Elevar, didn't you say everything you just said in your last post before? sweatdrop Now that you mention it, I did. Hmm...I'll throw the blame on early morning posting. Seems the best place for it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 9:25 pm
I'd like to mention that I also think rolls should be saved only when two forces are meeting equally. sweatdrop
I might have already said that, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 8:22 am
I'd say there, and when someone wants to attempt something that would normally be well nigh impossible for them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 8:25 am
I'm starting to think that any character I make, should just be wildly defined. Because I have rolled the Gaian dice at least twenty times. And have only gotten a number over six three times...
This does not bode well for me power playing. ninja
Not sure what else I could say on this topic. Seems like its' going somewhere?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 9:38 am
We've decided to implement a casting check (to be defined at a later date) as pertains to spells cast by mages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 7:36 pm
Cool.
Does DC increase by level, or decrease?
Example 1:
DC 10 for casting a level 1 spell at level 1.
DC 11 for casting a level 2 spell at level 2 (when it becomes available).
Example 2:
DC 10 for casting a level 1 spell at level 1.
DC 9 for casting a level 1 spell at level 2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2005 6:22 pm
D...C? What?
sweatdrop :: table top term illiterate ::
What we're going to have is a check for mages of all ranks. As your character rises in rank, you get a um.. What do you call it? "Modifier"?
Anyways, each spell will have a specific number that you'll have to roll the equivilent number or higher then to say that you casted. As you rise in rank, (Initiate -> Acolyte or something) You have number to add to your dice roll - A class modifier. (I think o_o; I suck at these terms)
That number's there so that your higher class is compensated in the dice roll. You add that number to whatever you rolled and you check if it's higher then the spell casting check.
I have no idea what the numbers are going to be... I suppose me and Truewind will get together to figure it out, and all the other crew members. sweatdrop
For those that don't get it, let me give you an example:
Say.... Light Arrows for an Acolyte had a difficulty of 4 to cast. Inorder to successfully cast the spell you'd have to roll a 4 or higher to do so.
And since you're an Acolyte, you have a rank bonus. So... It'd probably be a number like uhm... 2!
I roll a 3. gonk So I'm not lucky- but 3 + 2 = 5! You successfully cast.
The 2 came from your rank... sweatdrop Making sense now?
xp Blah I suck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 1:15 am
Yes, you've just described modifiers. razz
A modifier is:
(dice roll result) + (modifier) = (total)
I assume, then, that you're going to be using your d6s to do this, silly Sey? I suppose we should come up with a modifier list then, to do with that...
...which, then, I suppose... if it's d6, and you used light arrows (a level 1 spell) as a DC 4.
Level 1 spells - DC 4
Level 2 spells - DC 6?
So an initiate can cast a level 1 spell 33% of the time, but an aco baby, with his +2, could cast it 66% of the time. And an initiate would have to roll a full 6 to cast a spell one level higher than his rank, but an aco baby would only have to roll a 4, because his +2 turns it into a six...
Which would translate as:
Level - DC
1 - 4
2 - 6
3 - 8
4 - 10
5 - 12
Level - Bonus
Initiate - +0
Acolyte - +2
(whatever) - +4
Sage - +6
Avatar +8
...ending up with, it is always a DC 4 to cast a spell of your level. It is DC 2 to cast one level below you, and DC 6 to cast one level above you. At casting two levels down, it's DC 0, so you can't fail (unless we institute a critical failure rule). Meaning, you can't cast anything two levels above you (an initiate can't cast a level 3 spell), and anything two levels down automatically goes (a Sage can't fail at casting level 2 spells). And the first level that actually CAN cast Avatar-level spells is the Sage.
The only things that irk me here are the 2/3 failure at casting equal level spells. Though I suppose that could be tweaked out, maybe...
Maybe give a +2 for if the spell is prepared one round in advance, so it takes two rounds to do it. That would make the DC 2, so you would only fail 1/3 of the time instead of 2/3 of the time.
...though without putting an extra restriction on, that would allow a level 3 caster to cast level 5 spells with preparation. It would still only be a 1 in 6 chance to succeed, but it would be possible.
Anyways... I suppose I just made you a DC system in the course of my rant, so... enjoy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 1:25 am
Of course, we'd have to remember to give credit to spellcasters, now, because they have casting failure chance. Their spells should be powerful enough to be worth the time it takes to get them right, and they should try to be out of combat when they cast, because being able to prepare a spell adequately before it is being cast (it doesn't necessarilly have to be an extra post, but we'll say that they'd need at least ten seconds unmolested in order to get that +2 bonus... so you can't, say, have the mage duck under a sword swing and cast 'rod of fire' immediately if it's a challenging spell for him. He'd be better off preparing it before he entered combat so he didn't screw it up, or at least to have the team 'meat shield' keep the heat off of him so he can concentrate on his casting).
Adequate preparation or at least ability to concentrate on the task would allow the bonus, while being pestered, hurried, or grappled would obviously ******** it up hardcore.
Considering the 'high' chance of failure, though, we're going to have to remember that mages are dangerous if they can get their spells to work, so the fighter types shouldn't be so haphazardly dodging and weaving between spell strikes. xp
Of course, we should probably also institute a 'fumble' rule for fighters... not necessarilly whether they hit or not with their attack, but whether they screw up bad, like trip or something. Probably a lot harder to screw up than a simple casting failure, though...
Oh, and DC stands for Difficulty Class... basically 'number to beat'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 7:49 am
Oh. ^o^ Yay that's what it means. And YAY! We have a dice system! domokun
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:30 am
I like your system, Josh, but like you said, 66% chance to fail = ew.
So, though it's going to be even more work for me, I'd like to attach a casting difficulty to each individual spell rather than assigning a number to all spells associated with a certain rank.
More later, I have to jet for class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:12 am
Well, I thought about it, and, yeah... ew. But I think I got it wrong.
DC is 'beat or equal', isn't it... I blame the late night. But anyways... retooled.
Keep in mind it's only an initiate who would have a 66% 50% failure chance on his castings. The first levels. The guys who've just stepped into the world of coolness.
At acolyte level, they can cast the same spells with only a 1/6 chance to fail, or cast higher level (more difficult) spells with that same 50% chance to fail.
At third level, they can't fail at casting a first level spell.
I suppose it goes with the thought of 'practice makes perfect'. As long as they're not trying to cast on the fly, or aren't hurried or being shot at with arrows while they are preparing their spells, they would get the +2 and be able to cast spells of their level with only a 1/6 failure chance.
The higher level they are, the more experience they have, and the more 'second nature' it is to cast the low level spells, while the higher level, more complex ones, would still be difficult if they were forced to try and hurry their casting.
So, more or less, unless you roll a 1 on a D6 (as a 2 + 2 = 4, the DC for a first level spell), you'd get your spell off... becaue we don't really ENCOURAGE mages going directly into combat while trying to cast spells effectively, and this is sort of a bonus for staying OUT of the trenches.
Again, fixing my math.
Casting equal level spells = 50% failure chance.
Casting one level lower = 1/6 failure chance.
Casting one level higher = 1/6 success chance.
Prepared casting equal level = 1/6 failure chance.
Prepared casting one level lower = Automatic success.
Prepared casting one level higher = 50% failure chance.
Prepared casting two levels higher = 1/6 success chance?
Then again, if you attach separate DCs to each spell, then we don't really have to have 'third level' spells at all. Just separate them by DC and they can cast them when they're able to...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:30 am
*sigh*
As much as I love table top...Free form also has it's advantages as Angel...Grr...Joshua has proven numerous times. I like Ethan's suggestion much better. For something like this, it should be more based on creativity then stats and rolls. If you have a knight go against a knight, maybe have dice rolls if it gets out of hand but most of us are pretty mature. You don't see that many out of character fights over IC things. Just seems like too much is trying to be done.
*shrug*
Just my two cents worth.
...though Jello's basis does have a lot of merit if it comes down to it. IT is reasonable and mostly uncomplicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 5:59 am
Agreed.
I like a roll o' the die as much as the next person, but, as we have all seemed to prove, they aren't always the bestest of rolls. And even with stat additions it seems far too complicated for us "good ol' boys" RPers.
We're a smart bunch, as far as I'm concerned. The dice ideas may attract more people, or it may scare them off. Then again... our creative minds may scare them off anyway. Intimidation runs rampant through Gaia, whether intentional or not.
On that note, Ima go eat a waffle. That's right, Ima.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
